TrueBlueGED

You'll admit you were wrong about Auston Matthews long before Matt Moulson scores 20+ again.

Apparently I missed this, but Team USA named Quick the starter and has Schneider riding the bench? What in God's name does Jon Quick have to do to be recognized as merely an above average goalie? His style is fun as hell to watch, but Schneider and Bishop are both objectively better at stopping the puck. I'm cheering against USA because I don't want this group of buffoons anywhere near the Olympic team. Good lord.

Nice. Though to tie it to the discussion better, you could have said the weight of expectations upon Eichel's shoulders.

Risto. With all the hype of the forwards, our Cup contention status is firmly on his shoulders. I think he takes that next step forward this year, and I'm going to enjoy watching it.

I think a huge variable in how much offense we churn out is whether Bylsma loosens the chains some and allows a more aggressive style. I want to believe he was so conservative in approach last year because of the youth of the team and still having to rely on plugs in the top-9. That should change this year (barring a monumental run of injuries, I don't see Deslauriers getting scoring line time), and I hope he uses that to change tactics. 30: Eichel 20: Kane, ROR, Reinhart, Okposo Like others, I think Girgensons and Ennis chip in around 15 each.

I, too, wanted Eichel to show better in the first half of the game. The stick length stuff though is meh, whatever. Maybe he'd be better in tight, but it would also take away some of what makes him special. Let Jack be Jack. As to his 200 foot game, I think people are routinely equating back checking with defensive play. He had a few nice back checks, so to whoever wrote that article, it was a good defensive game. I find Wegmans cakes, in general, to be quite lacking. It feels like the batter is three times as heavy as it should be.

I don't have a shred of polling to back this up, but I'd be shocked if more than a third of the public could articulate anything about Aleppo in an open-ended question.

Dear digital signs on the Scajaqueda: I am not going too fast. I do not need to slow down. Your speed limit needs to be increased. 40 is not dangerously fast on that road in dry conditions. Related, does anyone know a good traffic attorney? Because I'm definitely going to need one to keep my license if they start heavily enforcing the speed :lol: Edit: Unrelated, today I had a student who thought he could change the time of my class to not conflict with football practice. I mean...no? What would possess anyone to think this was an option?

Like Bartlet vs Richie in the West Wing. People already dislike her so strongly, does she really have anything to lose by coming off as elitist? She's not well liked, people aren't going to vote for her for those nebulous interpersonal things. But people do have reservations about Trump's qualifications for the highest office. Make him look like the guy who yells a lot but has no substance. But we all know it's a debate in the real world, so it'll just be a whole bunch of regurgitation of campaign talking points.

AFC East: Patriots North: Bengals South: Colts West: Chiefs WC: Bills, Broncos NFC East: Cowboys North: Packers South: Panthers West: Seahawks WC: Cardinals, Bucs Superbowl: Packers > Patriots

If that's the truth of it, I can't imagine a scenario where it doesn't go to court.

If by bloviating you mean refusing to dismiss out of hand the potential for mitigating circumstances involved in a medical situation I have zero information on, then yes, guilty as charged. And please direct me to where I said, or even loosely asserted, pot was the only treatment for Crohn's. Should I wait, or shall I begin demolition of your strawman immediately? How much time have you spend talking with Seantrel about his Crohns disease treatments? How many consults with you has his attending physician sought? Don't bother answering, we all know the answer is zero. So unless you're willing to argue that because your family members have not received pot as part of their treatment then it's not a useful treatment for anyone, what exactly does your family have to do with this? Well, other than trying to give yourself some faux authority to take a shot at a GM you want fired, all while passing judgment on the moral fiber of the player. Bloviating indeed. What happened to n "we don't know all the facts" Freeman? Rape? Wait for all the facts! Weed? Low class loser! What a joke. I don't know why he was smoking weed. His history doesn't make it look good, for sure (though I'd also point out he has several pro seasons under his belt without issue...he's not Josh Gordon here). I'm not even arguing he had a justifiable reason. I simply don't know. My issue is entirely with your incredulous dismissal of the mere possibility of a medical reason, and using that to lob a molotov cocktail at the front office. Or maybe you already had the molotov cocktail prepped, and just needed an impetus to knee-jerk into throwing it.

If you want to hang your hat on "rules are rules" then that's your business. But bloviating about a medical situation you have zero information about simply because you want to take a shot at Whaley? That's some incredibly weak sauce right there.

Minus.

I think it's adorable how you all seem to need digital validation of your picks. I, on the other hand, am supremely confident in my own abilities and require no such reinforcement.

Should never just dismiss a poll. Is the outlying result likely to be a more accurate representation of the race than the average? Nope, not at all. But it's not impossible either. The fact of the matter is the race has been tightening and the Trump +1, while on the extremely unlikely side of things, is not outside the bounds of the possible. No, but you should be prepared to be called an uninformed idiot. And while I'm firmly on the left side of most racial issues, what African Americans face isn't exactly genocide. Edit: and seriously, I don't think you know what a white supremacist is.

Paging Dan Bylsma. Dan Bylsma to team North America practice please.

Uh. You're all-in on the Jags. I mean...

I know Bruce Banner. Bruce Banner is a friend of mine. You, WildCard, are no Bruce Banner.

I can draft better drunk than you can sober. And since you're already drunk...

I picked up a 6 pack of Flower Power after the gym. I bet I could drink all 6 between now and 9 and still do better than you.

I like beige walls :(

I can assure you, the media narratives that emerge and are beneficial for media outlets has zero to do with my analysis on this matter ;) The media matters some, but it's factor among many. For instance, the front runner normally runs a more conservative strategy and aims to protect the lead. Current example: Hillary's lead allowed her to spend the last two weeks fundraising rather than campaigning. It gave Trump an opportunity to cut into the lead some.

I'll believe you're capable of more than a tropical depression when I see it, and not a moment sooner :p Nice to see you admit there should be asterisks on it ;) :p

Narrative-wise, yes of course. But there's nothing mysterious about the race tightening. This was expected as it almost always happens. Also, the widest lead was combining a good convention bump for Clinton with arguably the worst two weeks of the Trump campaign.